June 11, 2003 at 11:56 pm #4969
RevMenParticipantJune 12, 2003 at 1:39 pm #5026
OK, I guess I misunderstood the whole scenario here.
I was thinking of this in terms of feedback, where you guys are going at it in terms of providing information to people looking for a film to watch.
I guess it should probably be both, but we seem to be on opposing ends of the spectrum.
I also thought that the reviews would be more diverse- I suppose there’s nothing stopping the average joe from putting his/her review on the forum…
Now, to try and answer Josh’s original question-
Since you don’t want an ‘overall’ rating, how about a ‘worth the download’?
That seems to get to the heart of it…June 12, 2003 at 2:21 pm #5028
YolegomanParticipantJune 12, 2003 at 6:51 pm #5061
Technical(the basics, animation, lighting, stuff like that-done well)
Character driven(having memorable characters)
Audio(though maybe this could go with Technical)
New Films(first films, anything good could perhaps be in another category
Too be honest, I dont know how well categorizing them like this might work. It would be a major headache classifying some films. Maybe having these classifications with only a select few films representing that trait could be used as a way to show newer filmers good examples of all that stuff. Then for all the films, divide them into categories like : humor, sci-fi, adventure, and so on. (Bear with me on this, I dont know how one would make this thing, im not a computer genius). Then when each film is given an initial review, you could have certain terms applied for good parts (technical, plot, audio, and so on). So then you have a search form that looks like:
Genre:_______________(humor,sci-fi,adventure and so forth)
Description:_____________(technical, audio,plot, and so forth)
Keep in mind the form would have more than that but thats the gist of it. Each film could have more than one “description” so that a search for “humor” with “technical” and “plot” comes up with any film that is meant to be humorous, is well animated and cleanly presented, and has a good story. The genre is of course defined by the filmer(and the film itself really) but the descriptions are determined when the films are reviewed by Hali and the other 5 reviewers(or how ever many you were going to have). you could then add a numerical rating system or leave it as is(so you wont know a bad film unless you read the review and decide if its worth watching as sometimes numbers can be misleading). but you could have a rating scale like:
40%- overall enjoyability(fun to watch)
5%- file size(lol)
Just my thoughts.June 12, 2003 at 7:18 pm #5065
Shootin BricksParticipantJune 12, 2003 at 7:27 pm #5066
strongest of the weakParticipantJune 12, 2003 at 7:35 pm #5068
BrickzParticipantJune 12, 2003 at 9:50 pm #5075
RevMenParticipantJune 13, 2003 at 8:16 pm #5159
Brian of GepParticipantJune 13, 2003 at 11:25 pm #5182
But setting that restriction just means you get the same bottleneck at 9/10. There’s no easy answer to this one, other than to be sparing with full marks.
It’s all about callibration. Here in the UK, most computer games mags treat 80% as the lowest mark you’d give to a game unless it’s actually physically unplayable. However, we have one games mag called Edge, which treats 5/10 as an average mark. Anything with 6/10 or more is worth playing, but I think only about 1 game every couple of years gets 10/10. Those are the “must haves” – Doom, Mario 64, Halo, etc.
For my money, the only brickfilm I’ve seen that would get 9/10 is ROTE, which is almost, but not quite, perfect. I have yet to see a 10, but when I do, I won’t hesitate to give it full marks.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.